Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 1st Apr 2007 21:56 UTC, submitted by suka
Novell and Ximian "Nat Friedman has been one of the driving forces behind the development of the Linux desktop for a few year now. First with his own company Ximian, founded together with Mono chief architect Miguel de Icaza, after its acquisition now inside Novell. A few months ago he has been named 'Technologist of the Year' by the VarBusiness magazine for his work around the SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop. Since then he has been promoted to Chief Technology and Strategy Officer for Open Source, besides the desktop he is also overseeing Novells server business now. During Novells Brainshare Andreas Proschofsky had the possibility to sit down with Friedman and talk about the Linux desktop, the consequences of the Microsoft agreement and the mistakes of the Hula project."
Thread beginning with comment 226423
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Tracker
by monodeldiablo on Sun 1st Apr 2007 23:11 UTC
monodeldiablo
Member since:
2005-07-06

My favorite part was when he trashed Tracker, calling it unnecessarily redundant, only to then go on and pimp Beagle's new tagging features, something even he admits Tracker did first. Feeling threatened, Nat?

I hate to sound like a fanboy, but the Tracker folks seem to be doing things the right way. It's fast, implemented in C, standards-based, has a very small dependency list and has bindings in your favorite language. Oh, and its maximum memory footprint is still way smaller than the Beagle team hopes to get theirs down to in the undetermined future.

Competition is good, Friedman. It's what makes this community so resilient, so quit your bad-mouthing. Learn from Tracker instead of trashing it.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Tracker
by milles21 on Sun 1st Apr 2007 23:26 in reply to "Tracker"
milles21 Member since:
2006-11-08

It amazes me half ass contributors always are quick to bad mouth people who are actually contributing. What I am saying is that it's like no one can have a damn opinion without being tore down. the same people who tear down Nat and Miguel conviently forget their contributions. I know I have opened the flood gates but damn I mean the bitching is old.

Liniux borrows features from other OS's nad it's an alternative. Let a closed source OS copy something Linux and it's oh the are copying not contributing. Since I know I will get the flames I am going to all out rant. What Linux needs is innovation and piublicity something that Nat and Novell has given. It is because of Novell and Linux that a whole new door has been open to end users. They may not know Redhat but they know Novell.

The introduction of beagle, and advances made Linux easier to use with the new sled menu. I guess I will stick to opensourcing the applications I develop and stay away from the community disputes it only destroys my belief in the benefits

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Tracker
by WorknMan on Sun 1st Apr 2007 23:53 in reply to "RE: Tracker"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

he same people who tear down Nat and Miguel conviently forget their contributions. I know I have opened the flood gates but damn I mean the bitching is old.

Speakin of which, what do you guys think of this comment from the article:

Sure there are consequences for Novell in the community resulting from the (Microsoft) deal, we have seen that, but not in the respect that someone says "Well, Novell as a business did this agreement with Microsoft, so we won't accept their patches". And most of that negative sentiments don't seem to come from the people who accept patches anyway, they come from people who have a sort of "professional commentator" role in the community.

In other words,the people who are bitching aren't the ones doing all the work. Classic ;)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Tracker
by monodeldiablo on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 00:31 in reply to "RE: Tracker"
monodeldiablo Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd like you to read my comment again, this time without your religious goggles on. At no point did I "bad mouth" Nat. I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy in Nat flaming a project while condemning those who flame, especially given that his criticisms were incredibly weak, considering the facts. I intentionally avoided personal attacks to prevent just the kind of knee-jerk defensiveness that you and your fellow personality cult worshippers exhibit.

His contributions are numerous and appreciated, but that doesn't make him God. Just like the rest of us, if he doesn't like Tracker, he can make it better or improve on his alternative. He sank to the level of his detractors by throwing his torch into the flamefest.

Edit: sPilLeng.

Edited 2007-04-02 00:45

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Tracker
by monodeldiablo on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 00:36 in reply to "RE: Tracker"
monodeldiablo Member since:
2005-07-06

This is a continuation of the prior reply, sorry...

Case in point: Nat made it a point to claim that Tracker "doesn't work half as good as Beagle, it doesn't do half the things that Beagle does at the moment", but fails to elaborate on what that "half" is.

Very constructive.

What was that about flaming again?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Tracker
by Jamie on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 00:28 in reply to "Tracker"
Jamie Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah that's a good April fool's joke (beagle being better than my tracker!)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Tracker
by GhePeU on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 08:15 in reply to "Tracker"
GhePeU Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't use a desktop indexer, I'm no beagle fanboy, but I'm SURE that I'll never install tracker unless they'll force me by making it a mandatory dependence.

I'm really sick of how tracker developers and users keep spamming of tracker everywhere: in the last months it seemed that no one could post in the GNOME mailing lists without being told that "tracker could solve his problem," no matter if it was the loading of .desktop files, the music player database, the translations of the names of the special folders or whatever. As Emmanuele Bassi put it, "tracker: a solution looking for a problem."

The only thing they didn't propose was to start tracker just after the linux kernel to index and load the modules. I'm not worried, however, I'm sure that they won't overlook this fondamental application of tracker any longer.

Edited 2007-04-02 08:16

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Tracker
by Jamie on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 12:30 in reply to "RE: Tracker"
Jamie Member since:
2005-07-06

First off only two posts on d-d-l were about tracker solving a problem - its a bit exaggerated to call it spamming.

I can sure understand some people not wanting a desktop indexer but they are a minority and the majority of users (IE not geeks) will definitely need this technology.

Hopefully, when we are more integrated into the desktop, you will see the clear benefits (especially becuase we are not just an indexer but an RDF triple store metadata database too)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Tracker
by g2devi on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 14:27 in reply to "RE: Tracker"
g2devi Member since:
2005-07-09

I haven't found the need to use desktop search yet (If you keep your files organized, you don't need to search), but I don't see a problem with the "tracker everywhere" proposal. *If* tracker is modular then several technologies inherent in an indexer should be applicable to many tasks. Why do we need to reinvent the square wheel? Doesn't Unix get it's enormous power by force-fitting everything to be like a file handle? If there's one central concept to understand, then implementing generic concepts that work on things that we haven't even thought of becomes a lot easier. It's called good design.

So here's my question to you. Do you see anything fundamental in the design of tracker that would prevent it from filling that generic role?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Tracker
by monodeldiablo on Mon 2nd Apr 2007 21:44 in reply to "RE: Tracker"
monodeldiablo Member since:
2005-07-06

Actually, there are a number of problems that Tracker solves (and solves nicely). For instance, open Rhythmbox with a library of 5,000 songs.

Wait for it... wait... hold on... Takes awhile to load, doesn't it?

Now, try importing some photos (let's say 100 RAW or large JPGs) into F-Spot. Watch that silly little progress bar creep along. You can keep reading along while F-Spot chugs, if you wish. Hell, you could order a pizza.

Now that you've finally got those two running (only two apps, mind you) check how much memory those hogs are consuming, just sitting there. On my computer, it's over 100 MiB. And I haven't even started using the damn apps, yet!

But if they simply made calls to Tracker when they needed information, they wouldn't have to hold a massive list of all the files, metadata, tags, versions, etc. in memory, would they (that's Tracker's job, remember)? Startup would be nearly instantaneous. And you wouldn't have to import your files into each application after you're already moved the files to your disk.

And, of course, search today is inconsistent across applications. Tracker is optimized for search (tag-based, keyword or service type), doing so better than either app, on more fields, yielding more relevant information. And Tracker can bring tagging to Rhythmbox and greater flexibility in sorting/organizing to F-Spot. For free! With less work! How nice of those Tracker folks.

With a single metadata store/indexer, the user gains consistency across the desktop, speed, memory and utility. Developers get to reduce the amount of application-specific code they need to write (think: far fewer bugs). Tracker promises to reduce development redundancy, speed up the apps you use every day and significantly shrink the memory footprint of the Gnome desktop.

Remember, my example only used two apps. Think of all the other projects on the Gnome desktop that are reinventing the "search", "index" and "tag" wheels. Tomboy alone sucks another 15-25 MiB of memory! And all it amounts to is a GUI for Tracker's tagging and object store capabilities.

So I've got to ask you, how is this bad, again? If I were you, I would read up on technology you're bashing before trying to discredit it. Your arguments are about as specious as claiming that filesystems or shared libraries are "solutions looking for a problem".

Reply Parent Score: 5